[1] The Earth Observing System (EOS) Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) aboard the Aura satellite has provided essentially daily global measurements of ozone (O 3 ) profiles from the upper troposphere to the upper mesosphere since August of 2004. This paper focuses on validation of the MLS stratospheric standard ozone product and its uncertainties, as obtained from the 240 GHz radiometer measurements, with a few results concerning mesospheric ozone. We compare average differences and scatter from matched MLS version 2.2 profiles and coincident ozone profiles from other satellite instruments, as well as from aircraft lidar measurements taken during Aura Validation Experiment (AVE) campaigns. Ozone comparisons are also made between MLS and balloon-borne remote and in situ sensors. We provide a detailed characterization of random and systematic uncertainties for MLS ozone. We typically find better agreement in the comparisons using MLS version 2.2 ozone than the version 1.5 data. The agreement and the MLS uncertainty estimates in the stratosphere are often of the order of 5%, with values closer to 10% (and occasionally 20%) at the lowest stratospheric altitudes, where small positive MLS biases can be found. There is very good agreement in the latitudinal distributions obtained from MLS and from coincident profiles from other satellite instruments, as well as from aircraft lidar data along the MLS track.

Abstract. Tropospheric ozone profiles have been retrieved from the new ground-based National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center TROPospheric OZone DIfferential Absorption Lidar (GSFC TROPOZ DIAL) in Greenbelt, MD (38.99 • N, 76.84 • W, 57 m a.s.l.), from 400 m to 12 km a.g.l. Current atmospheric satellite instruments cannot peer through the optically thick stratospheric ozone layer to remotely sense boundary layer tropospheric ozone. In order to monitor this lower ozone more effectively, the Tropospheric Ozone Lidar Network (TOLNet) has been developed, which currently consists of five stations across the US. The GSFC TROPOZ DIAL is based on the DIAL technique, which currently detects two wavelengths, 289 and 299 nm, with multiple receivers. The transmitted wavelengths are generated by focusing the output of a quadrupled Nd:YAG laser beam (266 nm) into a pair of Raman cells, filled with high-pressure hydrogen and deuterium, using helium as buffer gas. With the knowledge of the ozone absorption coefficient at these two wavelengths, the range-resolved number density can be derived. An interesting atmospheric case study involving the stratospherictropospheric exchange (STE) of ozone is shown, to emphasize the regional importance of this instrument as well as to assess the validation and calibration of data. There was a low amount of aerosol aloft, and an iterative aerosol correction has been performed on the retrieved data, which resulted in less than a 3 ppb correction to the final ozone concentration. The retrieval yields an uncertainty of 16-19 % from 0 to 1.5 km, 10-18 % from 1.5 to 3 km, and 11-25 % from 3 to 12 km according to the relevant aerosol concentration aloft. There are currently surface ozone measurements hourly and ozonesonde launches occasionally, but this system will be the first to make routine tropospheric ozone profile measurements in the Baltimore-Washington, D.C. area.

Table Mountain Facility in California (TMF). The main objectives of the campaign were to (1) validate the water vapor measurements of several instruments, including, three Raman lidars, two microwave radiometers, two Fourier-Transform spectrometers, and two GPS receivers (column water), (2) cover water vapor measurements from the ground to the mesopause without gaps, and (3) study upper tropospheric humidity variability at timescales varying from a few minutes to several days.Correspondence to: T. Leblanc (leblanc@tmf.jpl.nasa.gov) A total of 58 radiosondes and 20 Frost-Point hygrometer sondes were launched. Two types of radiosondes were used during the campaign. Non negligible differences in the readings between the two radiosonde types used (Vaisala RS92 and InterMet iMet-1) made a small, but measurable impact on the derivation of water vapor mixing ratio by the FrostPoint hygrometers. As observed in previous campaigns, the RS92 humidity measurements remained within 5 % of the Frost-point in the lower and mid-troposphere, but were too dry in the upper troposphere.Over 270 h of water vapor measurements from three Raman lidars (JPL and GSFC) were compared to RS92, CFH, and NOAA-FPH. The JPL lidar profiles reached 20 km when integrated all night, and 15 km when integrated for 1 h. Excellent agreement between this lidar and the frost-point hygrometers was found throughout the measurement range, Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. T. Leblanc et al.: MOHAVE-2009: overview of campaign operations and resultswith only a 3 % (0.3 ppmv) mean wet bias for the lidar in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS). The other two lidars provided satisfactory results in the lower and midtroposphere (2-5 % wet bias over the range 3-10 km), but suffered from contamination by fluorescence (wet bias ranging from 5 to 50 % between 10 km and 15 km), preventing their use as an independent measurement in the UTLS.The comparison between all available stratospheric sounders allowed to identify only the largest biases, in particular a 10 % dry bias of the Water Vapor Millimeterwave Spectrometer compared to the Aura-Microwave Limb Sounder. No other large, or at least statistically significant, biases could be observed.Total Precipitable Water (TPW) measurements from six different co-located instruments were available. Several retrieval groups provided their own TPW retrievals, resulting in the comparison of 10 different datasets. Agreement within 7 % (0.7 mm) was found between all datasets. Such good agreement illustrates the maturity of these measurements and raises confidence levels for their use as an alternate or complementary source of calibration for the Raman lidars.Tropospheric and stratospheric ozone and temperature measurements were also available during the campaign. The water vapor and ozone lidar measurements, together with the advected potential vorticity results from the high-resolution transport model MIMOSA, allowed the identification and study of a deep stratospheri...

A high‐ozone (O3) pollution episode was observed on 22 July 2014 during the concurrent “Deriving Information on Surface Conditions from Column and Vertically Resolved Observations Relevant to Air Quality” (DISCOVER‐AQ) and “Front Range Air Pollution and Photochemistry Experiment” (FRAPPE) campaigns in northern Colorado. Surface O3 monitors at three regulatory sites exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) daily maximum 8 h average (MDA8) of 75 ppbv. To further characterize the polluted air mass and assess transport throughout the event, measurements are presented from O3 and wind profilers, O3‐sondes, aircraft, and surface‐monitoring sites. Observations indicate that thermally driven upslope flow was established throughout the Colorado Front Range during the pollution episode. As the thermally driven flow persisted throughout the day, O3 concentrations increased and affected high‐elevation Rocky Mountain sites. These observations, coupled with modeling analyses, demonstrate a westerly return flow of polluted air aloft, indicating that the mountain‐plains solenoid circulation was established and impacted surface conditions within the Front Range.

Abstract. Thirteen clear nights in October 2005 allowed successful intercomparison of the lidar operated since 1987by the German Weather Service (DWD) at Hohenpeißenberg (47.8 • N, 11.0 • E) with the Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (NDACC) travelling standard lidar operated by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. Both lidars provide ozone profiles in the stratosphere, and temperature profiles in the strato-and mesosphere. Additional ozone profiles came from on-site Brewer/Mast ozonesondes, additional temperature profiles from Vaisala RS92 radiosondes launched at Munich (65 km north-east), and from operational analyses by the US National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP).The intercomparison confirmed a low bias for ozone from the DWD lidar in the 33 to 43 km region, by up to 10%. This bias is caused by the DWD ozone algorithm, and is consistent with previous comparisons of the DWD lidar with SAGE, GOMOS and other instruments. During HOPE, precision (repeatability) for ozone data from both lidars was better than 5% between 20 and 40 km altitude, dropping to 10% near 45 km, and to 50% near 50 km. These results are consistent with previous NDACC intercomparisons, and confirm the reliability of the NASA NDACC travelling standard lidar.Temperature from the DWD lidar showed a 1 to 2 K cold bias from 30 to 65 km against the NASA lidar, and a 2 to 4 K cold bias against radiosondes and NCEP. This is also consistent with previous intercomparisons. Temperature precision Correspondence to: W. Steinbrecht (wolfgang.steinbrecht@dwd.de) (repeatability) for the DWD lidar was better than 2 K from 30 to 50 km, decreasing to 10 K near 70 km. For the NASA lidar, precision is expected to be better than 1 K over the 30 to 70 km range. However, due to the much lower temperature precision of the DWD lidar, this could not be checked during HOPE. It was noted that the current DWD algorithm overestimates temperature uncertainty, which should be reduced by a factor of 2.2 (e.g. from 22 K to 10 K near 70 km).The HOPE intercomparison did uncover a 290 m range error (upward shift) of the DWD lidar data. When this shift is removed, the bias of the ozone algorithm is corrected, and a better background estimation is used, ozone profiles from the DWD lidar agree very well with both the NASA lidar and SAGE. Systematic differences are then smaller than 3% between 20 and 44 km, and smaller than 5% between 17 and 47 km. These differences are close to zero, and are not (statistically) significant. The cold temperature bias against the NASA lidar also disappears when the DWD temperature processing is corrected for the 290 m range error, and more appropriate values for the Earth's gravity acceleration are used. Compared to the radiosondes or NCEP analyses, however, both lidars show 1 to 2 K lower temperatures over the entire 15 to 35 km range.Temperature and ozone variations are tracked well by both lidars, by ozone-and radiosondes, and by NCEP analyses. Correlations exceed 0.8 to 0.9 at most stratospheric levels. The...